H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy vs Leila Meskhi H2H: 2-2
Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy and Leila Meskhi are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Leila Meskhi leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy won the 1994 Wimbledon first round 2-6 6-3 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
NED
Age 55
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
GEO
Age 58
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 1994* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | 2-6 6-3 6-4 | Leila Meskhi | Match data |
| Mar 15, 1994* | Key Biscayne | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | 6-4 6-2 | Leila Meskhi | Match data |
| Apr 6, 1989* | Hilton Head | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Leila Meskhi | 7-6 6-3 | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | Match data |
| Apr 28, 1988* | Tokyo Pan Pacific | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Leila Meskhi | 6-3 6-1 | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | #919 | #9 | 1,672 | 2,025 | 295 | 220 | 57.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Leila Meskhi | #903 | #12 | 72 | 2,001 | 192 | 119 | 61.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | Leila Meskhi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1987 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #149 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1988 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #40 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1989 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #83 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1990 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #43 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–7 | 61.1% | #46 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1991 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #30 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,688 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1992 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #33 | 1,818 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #30 | 1,794 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1993 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #40 | 1,789 | 0 | 3 | 1990 | 38–14 | 73.1% | #19 | 1,928 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1994 | 44–21 | 67.7% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1991 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #15 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1995 | 37–15 | 71.2% | #13 | 1,970 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #22 | 1,939 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1996 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #12 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 | 1993 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #37 | 1,874 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 1997 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,855 | 0 | 7 | 1994 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #34 | 1,843 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 1998 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #188 | 1,673 | 0 | 7 | 1995 | 5–2 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,834 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #893 | 1,651 | 0 | 7 | 1996 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #838 | 1,748 | 0 | 5 |
| 35 | 2006 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #299 | 1,642 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #190 | 1,614 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #391 | 1,592 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |